In every society there is the wealthy and the poverty-stricken. Although many may disagree, there is an unwritten obligation as human beings to care for one another and lend a helping hand to those in need. If those who have more than the less fortunate don’t give at some point and have compassion on those in need, then we are left with a selfish and cheap society. If we all work together as one, wealthy and impoverished, then this guarantees our survival as a human race and ultimately guarantees the formation of a united society. Often times we are too selfish to realize that we all got to where we are by way of assistance. This is clearly evident in Jonathan Swift’s “A Modest Proposal,” in which he shows compassion and care for those in need.
…show more content…
This means that the rich can afford to help the poor get back on their feet and stay afloat while still taking care of themselves. In “Lifeboat Ethics,” Hardin argues that if all the nations with overabundance provide resources for the impoverished nations, then in time those poor nations needs will actually be “increasing without limit” instead of diminishing altogether (Hardin 176). However, we see in Swift’s argument that having compassion on those in need produces better societies. There is a method to the madness. Whenever one nation decides to give in overabundance, they not only can give in resources, but can also teach the nation how to maintain and reproduce these resources. This in turn produces a new nation with which helpful citizens can live in unity. When one nation gives to another nation who then learns how to produce the necessary resources to survive without assistance, then it produces a ripple effect. Which then creates a system in which everybody helps everybody and no man is left behind. With Hardin’s mindset comes cynical thinking that in order to stay on top you must tread on those beneath you, however, it’s much easier to help people than it is to harm …show more content…
This helps the poor become contributors to society and not be leeches as many tend to see them. Similar to how Jonathan Swift satirically writes in “A Modest Proposal,” that he doesn’t want to hear other solutions, because they just won’t work (Swift 392). Swift is appealing to human compassion, and wants to show those who are against helping the needy how unreasonable they are being. Everyone has been or will be in need of assistance at some point in their life, and to just simply turn a blind eye to those in need is selfish and does the opposite of bettering the society. Hardin argues that helping those in need will, yes keep that nation afloat, but it will eventually lead to the environment suffering (Hardin 178). One can take a look at the past, however, and see that when wealthier nations, such as the United States, helped needy nations, such as Germany and Japan after World War II, there was a rebirth of the nations that received assistance. In turn, America also benefited, because they gained allies with those they helped, who also became powerhouse nations. Helping those in need is a sure way to better the economy as a whole and ultimately better the entire
This means that the rich can afford to help the poor get back on their feet and stay afloat while still taking care of themselves. In “Lifeboat Ethics,” Hardin argues that if all the nations with overabundance provide resources for the impoverished nations, then in time those poor nations needs will actually be “increasing without limit” instead of diminishing altogether (Hardin 176). However, we see in Swift’s argument that having compassion on those in need produces better societies. There is a method to the madness. Whenever one nation decides to give in overabundance, they not only can give in resources, but can also teach the nation how to maintain and reproduce these resources. This in turn produces a new nation with which helpful citizens can live in unity. When one nation gives to another nation who then learns how to produce the necessary resources to survive without assistance, then it produces a ripple effect. Which then creates a system in which everybody helps everybody and no man is left behind. With Hardin’s mindset comes cynical thinking that in order to stay on top you must tread on those beneath you, however, it’s much easier to help people than it is to harm …show more content…
This helps the poor become contributors to society and not be leeches as many tend to see them. Similar to how Jonathan Swift satirically writes in “A Modest Proposal,” that he doesn’t want to hear other solutions, because they just won’t work (Swift 392). Swift is appealing to human compassion, and wants to show those who are against helping the needy how unreasonable they are being. Everyone has been or will be in need of assistance at some point in their life, and to just simply turn a blind eye to those in need is selfish and does the opposite of bettering the society. Hardin argues that helping those in need will, yes keep that nation afloat, but it will eventually lead to the environment suffering (Hardin 178). One can take a look at the past, however, and see that when wealthier nations, such as the United States, helped needy nations, such as Germany and Japan after World War II, there was a rebirth of the nations that received assistance. In turn, America also benefited, because they gained allies with those they helped, who also became powerhouse nations. Helping those in need is a sure way to better the economy as a whole and ultimately better the entire